W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > June 2007

Re: [RDFa] ISSUE-28: following your nose to the RDFa specification

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 07:56:58 -0500
To: mark.birbeck@x-port.net
Cc: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1182430618.6367.413.camel@pav>

On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 10:47 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> Since RDFa could be processed server-side by pipeline tools, and
> client-side by an assortment of parsers, then I think it's legitimate
> to have different ways that RDFa might be spotted. My interpretation
> of the proposal under discussion is that it would give us the
> following scenarios:
> No DTD and no profile: it's legitimate to run an RDFa parser over an
> HTML/XHTML document, but you might not find anything.

This issue is about the case where you do find an RDFa
attribute (about/resource/etc); how do
you know that the author meant it in the RDFa sense?

>  At worse you
> might find things like <a rel="license" ... >, etc., which are already
> defined by HTML/XHTML.

No, at worse you get some triples out that the author didn't intend
because s/he didn't mean the markup to have RDFa meaning.

With no DTD and no profile, you can run an RDFa parser, but
I don't see how you can legitimately hold the author
to the triples you get out.

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2007 12:57:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:01:50 UTC